With all the transfers, these ratings are less useful than ever.  Just too hard for a metrics site to predict what a Joe Bamilile does in a new setting. 

That said, agree that Mason’s hype is overrated.   I think I’ve made my feelings about Deshawn Schwartz clear, but I’ll be shocked if he is really able to be the first option on a good team. He’s a role player on a good team, but I don’t think there’s too much of a difference between him and Brendan Adams.

FQ
Agree that with th movement this year the predictors are way irrelevant.  There is no way for them to account for a change in style or significant more playing time and how that will equate to an entire different performance.

I wish I could go back and look at Bishops predictions before last year.

Haven't read a good case for GW being any higher than 11-13.  Is there one?

When the Coaches and Writers picks come out, I'm certain we'll be picked around there by them too.

Gonzaga is #1 by a big margin, the next top 6 spots are 3 schools each from Big12 and Big10, continung a trend where those 2 are on top. The ACC once the strongest confernce has really slid down in recent years.

Only 1 ACC school top 20, SEC actually has 4.  

San Fransico is #34, part of a real rise in years.  Eye opening.  



 

Last edited by The Dude (10/17/2021 7:40 pm)

First AP top 25 poll is out. Looks Lot like KenPom

Of note:

St. Bonaventure is ranked for the first time in more than five decades. The Bonnies from the Atlantic 10 are No. 23, marking the first time they have been ranked since January 1971. That season was also the last time the program was ranked in the preseason (No. 20).

Are those all pre-season or post-season (or in between) rankings?

Look at Dayton with that #4 KenPom ranking.

An interesting question to ask is to what extent should TV's fate be tied to the men's basketball program.  On the one hand, this is by far the biggest revenue generating sport for the school.  On the other hand TV is responsible for overseeing many different sports.

So, if men's basketball continues to flounder, should the school be thinking about hiring a new AD even if many other programs are flourishing?

And, if men's basketball turns things around for the better but most other programs wind up disappointing, how does this scenario play out for TV?

Finally, if most sports (including men's basketball) perform below average but our student-athletes are graduating at very high percentages, demonstrating outstanding community service, and exhibiting great sportsmanship,  do these things combine to keep TV''s job safe?

(Disclaimer:  We have reached the point on this board  where I have to issue the following disclaimer.  This is not a post advocating that TV be fired.  Not in the slightest.  It is a post that asks which factors are the most or least important in determining whether GW should retain or release its AD.  Please add other factors should you find any to also be appropriate barometers.)

I really wonder about this contention that men's basketball is the biggest revenue generating sport for GW. Is that a net balance or just what comes in through diminishing ticket sales? The recent Buff and Blue Challenge showed MBB in 8th place among GW sports with 14 donors contributing $7,490. Men's polo was 1st with 94 donors contributing $30,160. Realize that's but one isolated indicator but all this griping about the supposed lack of commitment from Tanya and the school administration would seem to be matched and then some by fan indifference to the program. I certainly accept that there might be several individuals making 5 figure donations over and above their tickets and Club membership that did not feel it necessary to contribute to the Challenge but it's sad to see such little participation from everyone else. But then that seems to be normal to the GW experience.

BC wrote:

Are there any poor polo players?     It is pretty sad that there were only 14 MBB donors, though I admit to being one of the missing 39 1/2 million GW fans who didn't donate this year.

Even GW doesn’t have a polo team. That was water polo, the sole men’s survivor of truncated dual sports that cut men’s tennis and rowing while retaining the women’s teams. Keep an eye on men’s rowing though. That highly successful team has been aggressively seeking reestablishing itself as a varsity sport. After all, George Washington didn’t cross the Delaware in a sail or motor boat.

Gwmayhem wrote:

Poog, I imagine that at the vast majority of schools, men's basketball is the single highest revenue-generating sport or the second highest behind football.  Ticket sales are a part of this but so are broadcast revenues, sponsorships and licensing deals, and postseason tournament revenue which gets split among conference members.  You are correct that certain sports may receive more donations or more consistent support in general but when a school like GW is viewing its athletic department bottom line, men's basketball is responsible for the lion's share of revenue.  (By the way, this discussion is different than determining net income or profitability which factors expenses against revenue.)

Duly noted. Curious how A-10 TV arrangement fills the coffers given the number of GW promo ads that run during down time. Sadly, GW has never been a marketing powerhouse in this area dominated by pro franchises and multiple higher profile college teams. And it hasn’t been for  lack of trying. Return to a winning exciting product certainly would help.